SNCASE / Sud-Est Aviation designation (SE)

[PhR]

What ?,in TU magazine and Retrohydro site,it's as I explained,please see the picture (11)

Ok, I see. Thank you for sharing. I do not really consider Hydroretro as reliable source, and I suspect the TU source is probably the same. I never found traces of such SE-300 autogiro project in SNCASE archives or wind-tunnel test inventories. It never appears in SNCASE monthly internal reports. None from the people I interviewed when I worked in Marignane design office and at CEV mentioned it. I was also invited several times by the association "Mohican" which grouped the last survivors from Lioré et Olivier, and they provided to me plenty of information and documents, including the team from Pierre Renoux who managed the autogiro department. They never mentioned this project.

Nevertheless, it is possible. Initial SE-300 (ex Romano 111) was cancelled 23rd August 1938, one year afer having been ordered. The SE-300T seaplane was tested in wind-tunnel only during WW2. So there is a time hole in between where this number could have been reused. I am sceptic and I will try to find where this information comes from. Do you know in which issue of TU you found it?

 

[hesham]

X-230 was a low-wing 12/19 executive monoplane Project,powered by two 800 hp Astazou engines
X-240 was a tandem two-seat low-wing trainer and tourist monoplane Project,powered by one 200 hp Cont.
or Lycoming engine
X-250 was a low-wing medium airliner transport monoplane Project,powered by three Rolls-Royce/Snecma M45 jet engines,mounted two under the wing and one above the rear of the fuselage
X-260 was unknown design
X-270 was a side-by-side two-seat low-wing light monoplane Project,led to develop Socata TB-9
X-280 was a 3/4 seat light helicopter Project,based on Allouette II,powered by one Astazou II turboshaft engine,need
confirm
X-290 was unknown design
X-300 was a five-seat light helicopter Project,led to develop SA-340 Gazelle
X-310 was unknown design
X-320 was unknown design
X-330 was a tandem two-seat attack version of SA-330 Puma,Project only
X-340 was unknown design
X-350/I Rotojet was a 4/5 seat compound helicopter military Project,powered by two turboshaft engines
X-350/II Rotojet was version,intended for civil role,also powered by two turboshaft engines
X-350/III Rotojet was a 30/36 passenger transport Project version,powered by two turboshaft engines
X-350/IV Rotojet was a 50 passenger transport Project version,powered by three turboshaft engines
X-350/V Rotojet was a medium airliner Project version,,with stowed rotor,powered by three turboshaft engines
X-350/VI Rotojet was a medium transport Project version,with retractable rotor and V-tail,powered by two
turboshaft engines
X-350/VII Rotojet was a medium transport Project version,with disc rotor,powered by three turboshaft
engines
X-360 maybe early concept,with led to develop SA-360 Dauphin,need confirm
X-370 was a 3/4 light helicopter Project,powered by one Wankel-type rotary engine,led to developed SA-350
X-375 was a 3/4 light helicopter Project,powered by two Wankel-type rotary engines
X-380 was a SA-365N with combined composite rotorhub/mast, 5 blade rotor and swept tips

I think you are mixing the designations, not me. The false idea to have an X-300 in sequence after X-230, 240, 250 etc. is a pure mistake from your side. You misundertand how the numbering was assigned by SNCASE.

My dear Philippe,

you don't understand my point,of course this sequence was begun with SNCASE,and in 1957,after amalgamation
with SNCASO to be Sud Aviation,and after it started from X-200,and reached X-223.X-224 & X-225,they continued
with next entry,which was X-230,then X-240,X-250 ....,X-270,X-280 and X-300,up to X-380,later with Aerospatiale.

And that's not related to early X-300 for helicopter,which did show up after the WWII,so we have two X-300,
the first after the war immediately and passing with X-301,X-302 up to X-316,and the second X-300 which
was by Sud Aviation.

 

[hesham]

Ok, I see. Thank you for sharing. I do not really consider Hydroretro as reliable source, and I suspect the TU source is probably the same. I never found traces of such SE-300 autogiro project in SNCASE archives or wind-tunnel test inventories. It never appears in SNCASE monthly internal reports. None from the people I interviewed when I worked in Marignane design office and at CEV mentioned it. I was also invited several times by the association "Mohican" which grouped the last survivors from Lioré et Olivier, and they provided to me plenty of information and documents, including the team from Pierre Renoux who managed the autogiro department. They never mentioned this project.

Nevertheless, it is possible. Initial SE-300 (ex Romano 111) was cancelled 23rd August 1938, one year afer having been ordered. The SE-300T seaplane was tested in wind-tunnel only during WW2. So there is a time hole in between where this number could have been reused. I am sceptic and I will try to find where this information comes from. Do you know in which issue of TU you found it?

Of course I disagree with that,the TU magazine is a reliable source,and there is another source,may Encyclopedia,forget
its name,that's because I am in another house,and I don't have all my stuff,and could be re-allocated,because the SE.300
autogyro was in 1936/37,the TU numbered 295.

 

[PhR]

Of course I disagree with that,the TU magazine is a reliable source,and there is another source,may Encyclopedia,forget
its name,that's because I am in another house,and I don't have all my stuff,and could be re-allocated,because the SE.300
autogyro was in 1936/37,the TU numbered 295.

Hello Hesham,
I said that I don't trust all information from Hartmann in Hydroretro site because I found a lot of errors. Nevertheless, it's a very interresting source of information. He shared a lot of original documents and provides huge quantity of information. I need to just take distance, as it is not an original source, so it requires confirmation from other origin to overlap.

I am myself one of the contributors of the TU. As you have undoubtedly noticed, I always favor original document, instead of publications from books or magazines. The Trait d'Union magazine is an excellent source, where various specialists share their knowledge, information... and doubts! This is why it is very important to me to know where an information comes from. Is it from archives? Testimony? collection? Hypothesis? Logical deduction? Or is it a copy from another writer?

In TU 295, Charles Claveau refers to a previous issue. I finally found it in one of the complements from his series about French manufacturers. As you can see attached, he explains from where the information comes: Hartman's site! It confirms exactly what I said before: "I suspect the TU source is probably the same". This is confirmed by the author himself.

 

[PhR]

My dear Philippe,

you don't understand my point,of course this sequence was begun with SNCASE,and in 1957,after amalgamation
with SNCASO to be Sud Aviation,and after it started from X-200,and reached X-223.X-224 & X-225,they continued
with next entry,which was X-230,then X-240,X-250 ....,X-270,X-280 and X-300,up to X-380,later with Aerospatiale.

And that's not related to early X-300 for helicopter,which did show up after the WWII,so we have two X-300,
the first after the war immediately and passing with X-301,X-302 up to X-316,and the second X-300 which
was by Sud Aviation.

Hello Hesham,
first of all, I don't want to hurt you. You made very huge work trying to compile manufacturers listings. This is a very difficult work that I appreciate. I think that about 95% of your lists are correct. I just try to help you fixing the remaining 5%.
I don't know from where you took this idea that SNCASE used numbers in sequence. Unfortunately, SNCASE is good exemple of non-continuous numbering and non-homogenous application of their internal rules.

From the beginning, just after WW2, the X series were introduced to replace the SE-0xx numbers, and they were allocated by slices to different design offices. So there was never continuity from X-200 series, and no overflow from one slice to another. There was never any X-300 in sequence after X-2xx. You can forget these hypothetic initial X-300/301/302.

Also note that initially, the slice 4000 was assigned to Marignane (Poitou office), before being re-assigned to Cannes. This is why the X-104 became the SE-4000. Then the Cannes series started with SE-4100, followed by SE-4200, 4300, 4400 and 4500 with their variants.
Some offices designed their projects in sequence, such as Cannes up to X-422. But for La Courneuve helicopters, they started very late using these designations, and not in sequence. The first I know are X-315, 316 and 317 presented to Official State Services in May 1955.

After fusions of companies, other X-xxx designations continued to be used, but not in sequence. I personnally worked at Marignane on X-350 (reused number), while one of my neighbours in the open office shown me a project for tilt-rotor, knowing that an X-910 was abandoned 10 years earlier.

 

[hesham]

From the beginning, just after WW2, the X series were introduced to replace the SE-0xx numbers, and they were allocated by slices to different design offices. So there was never continuity from X-200 series, and no overflow from one slice to another. There was never any X-300 in sequence after X-2xx. You can forget these hypothetic initial X-300/301/302.

My dear Philippe,

that's right for SNCASE only,but how can you explain,after last experimental number of SNCASE "X-225",they began
in Sud Aviation with X-230,and I am asking,from where the number 230 was came ?.

So weird my dear,you told me as I knew,X-300 was assigned to helicopter after WWII,this means they started from
it,and how do you explain in the same series for early SNCASE these numbers,X-310,X-315 & X-316 for helicopters ?,
the only logic thing,that the X-300 followed by 301.302,303,304 up to 310,and raised to 315 and 316,right ?.

 

[PhR]

So weird my dear,you told me as I knew,X-300 was assigned to helicopter after WWII,this means they started from
it,and how do you explain in the same series for early SNCASE these numbers,X-310,X-315 & X-316 for helicopters ?,
the only logic thing,that the X-300 followed by 301.302,303,304 up to 310,and raised to 315 and 316,right ?.

I try desperately to explain to you: please stop thinking "logic". There is no logic behind, just choices! Trying to introduce logic in French company designations is is one of the most sure path to make errors.
As soon as you try to follow "logic", you introduces bias. So, please just stay to what is recorded and don't try to fill the holes. By doing this, you create fakes and legends.

In the case of SNCASE studies for example, as you can see below, there is no "logic", there is no chronology, just choices:
- X-300: 1966, light helicopter HLO/HLU.
- X-305: 1950, helicopter for medical evacuation, rescue and liaison.
- X-310: 1953, light helicopter concept for tubine engine. 7th project X-310G was the starting base for SE-3130 Alouette II prototype.
- SE-311 (not X-311, I don't know why): 1953, twin-rotor helicopter
- X-315: 1955, twin-turbine executive helicopter
- X-316: 1955, heavy helicopter
- X-317: 1955, turbine-driven helicopter

 

[PhR]

I am asking,from where the number 230 was came ?.

It came only from the head of the engineer who selected that number. Don't try to look further. There is nothing behind.

 

[hesham]

With no offence,only you explanation is not logical,but the company itself has,after WWII,as you mentioned
they started with X-300,that means X-300,X-301,X-302,X-303,X-304 up to X-305,but we don't know the
earlier (300 to 304),it's not necessary they were not existing ?!.

For X-300 it another series completely,and even for Sud Aviation,and not SNCASE.

 

[PhR]

OK, if you are not interrested by the reality, I let you invent whatever unverifiable alternative truth you want.

 

[hesham]

OK, if you are not interrested by the reality, I let you invent whatever unverifiable alternative truth you want.

You didn't answer my logical questions,and still told us that,the X-300 example had no sense,also you mentioned
a small part of reality not all,if you are right ?,tell us what was early X-300 series for helicopters after WWII,from
X-300 to X-304 ?!.

 

[PhR]

You didn't answer my logical questions,and still told us that,the X-300 example had no sense,also you mentioned
a small part of reality not all,if you are right ?,tell us what was early X-300 series for helicopters after WWII,from
X-300 to X-304 ?!.

We know what is the X-300: this is the project HLU/HLO, which became the Gazelle. If you find a document about another project X-300 before 1966, Great! Please share it. If not, it's maybe possibly because this number was not used. However, any supposition about potential existence without evidence has no value. Even logical "deduction" has also no value. People do not always choose to follow numerical numbers. They may choose a number just because they like it, or decide to reserve numbers for another future usage if any. Sometimes it is finally used, sometimes not.

SNCASE engineers apparently decided to start their studies with X-305, 310, 315. They came back to X-300 in 1966. This is their choice, not yours. Nobody has disclosed other projets using numbers in between, so, it is possible that they never existed. You don't know, me neither. So mentioning it is just creating a fake.

 

[hesham]

We know what is the X-300: this is the project HLU/HLO, which became the Gazelle. If you find a document about another project X-300 before 1966, Great! Please share it. If not, it's maybe possibly because this number was not used. However, any supposition about potential existence without evidence has no value. Even logical "deduction" has also no value. People do not always choose to follow numerical numbers. They may choose a number just because they like it, or decide to reserve numbers for another future usage if any. Sometimes it is finally used, sometimes not.

SNCASE engineers apparently decided to start their studies with X-305, 310, 315. They came back to X-300 in 1966. This is their choice, not yours. Nobody has disclosed other projets using numbers in between, so, it is possible that they never existed. You don't know, me neither. So mentioning it is just creating a fake.

My dear,you claimed that the series maybe X-305,X-310 & X-315,if that was right,the next two entries must be X-320
and X-325,but the opposite is what we found,they were X-316 and X-317,so the only solution for that is the archive
has many many missing projects,we don't know it as appeared in other sequences,and this explain the gaps between
the series of X-300.

 

[Arjen]

the archive has many many missing projects,

No.

'the archive' has a discontinuous collection of project numbers. This should not be construed as evidence of the existence of numbered projects to fill the perceived numerical gaps.

To repeat:

Nobody has disclosed other projets using numbers in between, so, it is possible that they never existed. You don't know, me neither. So mentioning it is just creating a fake.

 

[hesham]

'the archive' has a discontinuous collection of project numbers. This should not be construed as evidence of the existence of numbered projects to fill the perceived numerical gaps.

No sense at all to use this series from company; X-305,X-310,X-315 then X-316 & X-317 ?!.

The only logical thing as in many French companies,the archives are missing some designations,we see for
example,Morane Saulnier,there were a lot of gaps in it,why ?,they lost them.

 

[Arjen]

As Mark Twain wrote:
"Truth is stranger than fiction, but it is because Fiction is obliged to stick to possibilities; Truth isn't."

Assigning project numbers in a continuous sequence is esthetically pleasing, superficially logical, but (company) politics hand us numbers that, at first sight, appear illogical. Business, legal or political logic steps in, and we get Windows 10 instead of Windows 9. Or F-35 instead of F-24, B-21 instead of B-3, Porsche 911 instead of Porsche 901, SAAB 900 instead of SAAB 100.
The list is nearly endless.

 

[PhR]

The only logical thing as in many French companies,the archives are missing some designations,we see for
example,Morane Saulnier,there were a lot of gaps in it,why ?,they lost them.

Contrary to your imaginary "logic" without any basis, the real known sequence in time is the following one: X-305, X=310, SE-311, X-315, X-316, X-317, X-300, X-350, X-910, X-370, X-350, X-380. These are just facts.

 

[hesham]

Contrary to your imaginary "logic" without any basis, the real known sequence in time is the following one: X-305, X=310, SE-311, X-315, X-316, X-317, X-300, X-350, X-910, X-370, X-350, X-380. These are just facts.

I disagree,that's no sense in it,the archive is not completed,many were missing.

 

[PhR]

that's no sense in it

Yes. But it's true and factual.

the archive is not completed,many were missing.

Certainly, but we have no evidence at the moment, until somebody provides new reliable material. Any other approach is worthless.

 

[dan_inbox]

I disagree,that's no sense in it,the archive is not completed,many were missing.

Then the practical and productive action path from there is to

1. list the known and documented projects (as PhR did in #137);
2. keep an eye open for any new evidence of a project carrying one of the unusued numbers;
3. NOT assert the existence of such projects until such evidence appears, lest one would create one of those never-dying internet rumors, which would not help knowledge advance.

Note that you or anyone else can keep an eye open and even have a private list of "missing-numbers-possible-projects" to look for, but should just not publish them as "existing but not yet discovered", which would start the wrong road.

 

[hesham]

Hi,

as we see in my reply # 86,the X-100 is regular;X-100,X-101,X-102 ........etc,the X-200 is regular;200,X-201,X-202.........etc,
the X-400 is regular; X-400,X-401,X-402 .....etc,aslo X-500,give me one reason to be the X-300 un-regular,of course not,
but there are a lot missing designations in the archive,also for "SE" series,many gaps.

 

[PhR]

X-116 Voltigeur was a 2/3 seat army support aircraft capable of observation and ground attack operation,
powered by two Wright Cyclones radial,later with 650 hp Turbomeca Bastan turboprop engines,later became
a SE-116
X-116B Voltigeur was a version powered by two 800 hp Wright C7 turboprop engines,Project
X-117 Voltigeur was a third prototype,also powered by two 760 hp Turbomeca Bastan turboprop engines,later
became SE-117
X-118 Diplomate was a light transport version of X-117,with low-wing and powered by two 760 hp Turbomeca Bastan turboprop engines,later became SE-118
X-118/I Diplomate was a refined version of X-118,powered by two 760 hp Turbomeca Bastan turboprop
engines,also called SE-118,Project
X-118/II Diplomate was a navigator trainer version,also powered by two 760 hp Turbomeca Bastan turboprop
engines,also called SE-118

I do not agree:
The SNCASE studies X-116A and X-116B designed by Poitou's office located in Marignane were purchased by French State order number 3022/57 and then became the "Voltigeur", respectively renamed as SE-116-01 with Wright radial engines and SE-116-02 with Bastan turboprops.
A third one was ordered as SE-117-03, with enlarged fuselage and Bastan turboprops. An SE-117A project was studied with Wright engines. If an X-117 has ever existed, it does not have any relationship with the SE-117.
Then, the next studies were SE-118 "Diplomate" and SE-119, which, as far as I know, were never called "X-" someting.
I placed additional information here:

https://www.secretprojects.co.uk/threads/sncase-sud-est-aviation-projects.3178/page-3#post-686020

https://www.secretprojects.co.uk/threads/sncase-sud-est-aviation-projects.3178/page-3#post-686131